Mexico weekly ledger., 1887-02-03
SLOWLY COMING OUT.
A MANLY LETTER FROM DR.. s. p.
JONES TO THE PEOPLE OF THE
SEVENTH DISTRICT.
He Vindicates His Character and Fires
Into the Camp Of a Congressional
Aspirant.

Dr.. Paul Jones, in franklin County Observer.
From the fact that the Troy Herald
and the Mexico LEDGER, in recent
issues, republished the vile attacks of
the notorious slang-whanger of the
Troy Free Press on my person and
character, 1 deem it necessary to say
to the people of the Seventh Con-
gressional District, that [ never did
at any time pledge my support to R.
H.. Norton in the recent Compression
al Convention at Mexico. In sup
port of this fact 1 have proof of SO
high a character that even the Free
Press must admit it to be conclusive
on this point.
My authority for this statement is
no less than r. FL. Norton himself,
and given in a letter written to me
by that gentleman, which reads as
follows:
NoRTON's LETTER
Troy, Mo-, August p, 1SS6.-Dr.
S. z. JoNEs.-Dedr Sir. - Judge
Robinson and ONE of his friends are
claiming very zealously some three
votes from the Franklin delegation
1t behooves me to know exactly how
L stand. Will you therefore pardon
me for asking you if I can rely on
you to stand by me in the convention
at Mexico as long as my name is be.
fore it?'
This letter was signed R. H. Nor
ton. I did not answer it, in fact, had
no right to do so for the simple fact
that l vas not at that time a delegate
by proxy or otherwise to the con-
gressional convention to meet on
August 31st, 1886, at Mexico. 1t is
true j. T. Roark had solicited me to
act as his proxy in that body, but nc
legal transfer of his right to act as 8
delegate had been made to me at that
time, nor was this done for several
days after the above letter was re-
ceived from r. H. Norton.
Under the circumstances I consid.
cred it my duty to turn Norton's let
ter W. to j. L. Roark, which | did,
and Informed him at the same time
that l could not accept a proxy from
him if he desired me to comply with
the request Of Mr.. Norton.
To this 1 received the following
reply from j. T. Roark:
CAMPBELLToN, Mo, August IS.
1856 DIR. S. L. JONES : In reply to
letter from r.. H. Norton, / desire to
say that | am not for any person as
the democratic nominee, first, last
and all the time, nor do [ desile you
as my proxy to feel yourself bound to
any candidate before the convention
in that way. Yours, ETC.,
j. I. RoARK.
From this l submit the question to
the people of the Seventh Congress
sional district as to whether my prin-
cipal, j. T. Roark, or r. H. Norton,
considered me bound to cast my vote
for Mr.. Norton to the exclusion OF
all candidates before that body $50
long as Norton name was before it..
l never did conceal my position
relative to the several candidates
either prior or SO subsequent to the
meeting of u county convention.
Norton knew my position in this re.
speet. In the very first interview
ever had with that gentlemen 1 in.
formed him that Robinson was my
choice. j. I. Roark knew l was foI
Robinson, and the people of Frank.
lin county also knew 1t.
All who were present at the county
convention must well remember thai
l fought against and was instrument
tai in defeating a resolution introduc.
ed in that body for the purpose oil
instructing the delegates from Frank.
lin county to the Congressional Con.
yention.
No n of the several candidates
could have entertained the least hone
for a resolution instructing the
Franklin delegation in their indiyid
ual interest, provided the prophet,
of SO doing was discussed In the con.
y%ention, and that subject was discuss.
ed and defeated. We had enough o,
this in 1884. But the great impro
priety of instructing the delegation
from Franklin for Norton al be more
fully understood when We take into
consideration the fact that he had
only ten delegates elected for him by
the people in the Franklin count,
convention, which was composed o.